Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

4chan, 8chan blocked by Australian and NZ ISPs for hosting shooting video

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 184 posts

Re: 4chan, 8chan blocked by Australian and NZ ISPs for hosting shooting video

#101

Post by krapp »

mixologic wrote: post #52
kbenson wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're either for free speech or you're not, and as much as I would like to have some absolute reference of good and bad, it's all culturally defined. I mean, I think it's horrible, but I can envision lots of functional and useful societies that are horrible based on my principles (how would you like to to be part of a hize mind?), but that doesn't make them bad in an absolute sense. Scaled down, freedom of speech is…

Yeah, free speech doesnt mean "anything goes". We as a society have made the determination that there are categories of speech that are harmful, and as such are illegal. You cant libel, you cant slander, you cant shout "Fire" in a crowded theater. Speech that advocates for the supression or termination of other people based on their race is "Hate speech" and also illegal. There is neither value nor need for complete…

>Yeah, free speech doesn't mean "anything goes".

Yes, it does. It has to, otherwise free speech is defined as any arbitrary level of censorship a government allows, and one could say North Korea has just as much "free speech" as the US.

Now, I'm not making an argument that free speech as such is preferable or even feasible in a civil society, or that censorship per se is wrong, and I'm definitely not making the typical slippery slope argument that any form of censorship will inevitably lead to tyranny.

However, free speech has to be defined as a constant to mean anything objective.

Re: 4chan, 8chan blocked by Australian and NZ ISPs for hosting shooting video

#102

Post by nothal »

bryanlarsen wrote: post #65
DigiMortal wrote: post #36

They're arresting people for sharing the video This is fucked

They're arresting people for sharing the video along with encouraging comments. They aren't arresting journalists for showing clips. Shouting "FIRE" in a crowded theatre has always been illegal.

As I mentioned further up the thread, it was illegal for about 50 years in the US as a hypothetical but it’s no longer a legitimate legal standard. Shouting fire in a crowded theater isn’t illegal (at least, it isn’t not free speech). See Brandenburg v. Ohio and how it overruled the prior Schenk standard.

Re: 4chan, 8chan blocked by Australian and NZ ISPs for hosting shooting video

#103

Post by nothal »

m23khan wrote: post #45

despicable websites such as rotten.com and liveleak should also be banned -- they really mess up human brain. Some reddit subreddits are extremely graphic and twisted too.

Should we maintain websites displaying photographic evidence of the holocaust? The Vietnam war? Combat footage from Iraq/Afganistan?

Re: 4chan, 8chan blocked by Australian and NZ ISPs for hosting shooting video

#104

Post by clb4mf »

computerex wrote: post #98

It's good that the ISP's decided to act on their own in this case, and they weren't ordered by the courts. But can't say I am a fan of this. Why participate in censorship? Once something is on the Internet, it's not gonna go away. It's trivial to get the shooting footage for those who want to see it. Censoring is a band aid at best. These tragedies happen because of an underlying problem. Address gun laws, address xe…

aaaa

Re: 4chan, 8chan blocked by Australian and NZ ISPs for hosting shooting video

#105

Post by 101001001001 »

Oribi wrote: post #54
tombert wrote: post #39

It makes me sad how 4chan has largely been reduced to a place where racists and bigots and sexists hang out. When I was a teenager, it felt like the racists in /b/ were doing it ironically (maybe I was wrong?), but now it seems like a place to spout off white-nationalist nonsense, and whenever its called out the people fall back on "it's just a joke bro!"

How can you be ironically racist, and why is that better than racism?

If you look inside a persons mind, an ironic racist says racist things simply to make fun of people who get too easily offended by racism. Someone who is actually racist says those things and also believes them.

Ten years ago, in white suburbia, saying “nigger” was worse than murdering someone. It was clear that a social feedback system had developed where the least racist person was considered most virtuous, leading to people doing all kinds of rediculous things in order to be least racist, the denial of common sense and logic and true statistics became like a thorn in the mind of anyone who was not swayed by herd mentality.

It was in this atmosphere of deadly seriousness about racism that it became outrageously funny to say racist things. Just like every other anti-racism effort by white affluent people, it only made everything worse and made racism funny. I guarantee that without this atmosphere of hyper-anti-racism, people would not have been saying “nigger” on early 4chan.

As 4chan got more popular the average iq went down and the proportion of people that really meant it increased.

Re: 4chan, 8chan blocked by Australian and NZ ISPs for hosting shooting video

#106

Post by derekp7 »

skybrian wrote: post #94
identity-haver wrote: post #23

Just a thought experiment: so it's after 9/11. Nobody will show a video of the planes flying into the towers. The only place you can watch the video is ISISchan.org, and there are news articles about how many countries banning ISISchan.org & how problematic ISISchan.org is (don't go to ISISchan.org, kids!). Now instead of watching a clip on CNN you've got people absorbing all the extremist propaganda on ISISchan.

I'm very biased against video. I don't watch TV news or reshared political videos. I'm quite happy that Hacker News doesn't host video; you can link if needed. So, I have questions: There are specialized uses, but for most of us, I'm skeptical that it's important to have video of news events as they happen. If nobody caught 9/11 on video, what would be different? For many years, no cameras were allowed in courtrooms…

Different people's brains process information in different ways. Others are better at absorbing information through text, and yet others need hands-on experience to learn something. There's a reason for the phrase "a picture is worth a thousand words".

Re: 4chan, 8chan blocked by Australian and NZ ISPs for hosting shooting video

#107

Post by AckSyn »

krapp wrote: post #84
rc_kas wrote: post #63

I hate 4chan so much, its a diseased cesspool of morons. However, I hate the idea blocking them. Its such a slippery slope from censorship of bad websites to moving to censorship of good websites that the government does not like. Edit: Also, facebook pro-actively took down the video as soon as they became aware.

>Its such a slippery slope from censorship of bad websites to moving to censorship of good websites that the government does not like. Is it really, though, or do people just like the slippery slope fallacy a bit too much? Does everyone really think that if a government bans 4chan, no one and nothing is going to stop them from banning everything else because there's precedent now and nothing can be done? That's not h…

You must not work for government, because once they have a foothold into socially and even legally dubious methods/ideas, they'll continue to encroach on rights and abilities like the zerg creep.

Don't allow it to happen in the first place and it won't happen. History is rife with examples.

Re: 4chan, 8chan blocked by Australian and NZ ISPs for hosting shooting video

#108

Post by apta »

mooseburger wrote: post #78
bduerst wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, they specifically censor content like child pornography, torrent links (AFAIK), and some other material. There are situations where the expression of certain speech, like the generation and propagation of child pornography, harms others and should not be allowed. Even the original FS philosophers mostly agreed on this type of censorship.

Generation of CP harms others yes, but propagation does not. Always did regard the criminalization of possession and propagation of CP as a censorious overreach.

The argument is that propagation (and consumption) encourages those who generate such things to keep on going since they see there is a market for them. I guess kind of similar to banning sales of ivory to kill the market, and in turn, reduce or wipeout the incentive for the hunters.

Re: 4chan, 8chan blocked by Australian and NZ ISPs for hosting shooting video

#109

Post by rc_kas »

krapp wrote: post #84
rc_kas wrote: post #63

I hate 4chan so much, its a diseased cesspool of morons. However, I hate the idea blocking them. Its such a slippery slope from censorship of bad websites to moving to censorship of good websites that the government does not like. Edit: Also, facebook pro-actively took down the video as soon as they became aware.

>Its such a slippery slope from censorship of bad websites to moving to censorship of good websites that the government does not like. Is it really, though, or do people just like the slippery slope fallacy a bit too much? Does everyone really think that if a government bans 4chan, no one and nothing is going to stop them from banning everything else because there's precedent now and nothing can be done? That's not h…

If Trump had the power to censor bad websites, think about how much effort he would currently be putting into censoring any website that talked about him badly.

We should be glad he has no such power.

Post reply on HN